[00:00:03]
[Call to Order]
ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.IT IS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4TH, AND THE FIRST THING I'M GOING TO DO IS CALL ROLL, AND I'M THE ONLY ONE UP HERE TONIGHT.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE CELEBRATING AND ARE NOT WITH US.
UM, COMMISSIONER DINKLER IS NOT HERE.
AND COMMISSIONER GREENBERG IS ALSO OUT.
UM, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.
UM, IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY LIAISON? ANDRE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO OVER THE CONSENT AGENDA THEN.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES AS SHOWN? YES.
UH, CORRECTIONS, UH, THE MINUTES SHOULD REFLECT THE DATE OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20TH, UH, 2022.
AND THE, THAT'S THE SAME DATE THAT IT WAS CONVENED.
SO THOSE DATE CORRECTIONS NEED TO BE MADE.
AND ALSO, UH, COMMISSIONER KING CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AND ALSO ADJOURNED THE MEETING.
AND COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIR BARRE RAMIREZ WAS ABSENT AND, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODY WAS IN ATTENDANCE.
AND THEN ONE OTHER FINAL THING.
I BELIEVE AT THE, UH, LET'S SEE, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE MINUTES, THE SECOND TO THE LAST PARAGRAPH, I THINK IS REDUNDANT.
IT ABOUT, IT TALKS ABOUT THE MINUTES, UH, APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED ALSO FROM THE, FROM THE DRAFT MINUTES.
THOSE ARE ALL THE CORRECTIONS.
[Consent Agenda]
OKAY, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND KEEP GOING WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA.SO ITEM NUMBER TWO IS ON CONSENT.
IT'S C 14 20 22 0 0 9 7 15 0 7, AND 1515 BASTROP HIGHWAY.
UM, IT'S RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE AND FOUR ARE ON THE DISCUSSION AGENDA.
UH, ITEM FIVE IS IT'S, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS SEEKING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 18TH AND IT'S C 14 20 22 0 0 7 7 2 20.
RALPH ADO REZONING AND IT'S RECOMMENDED WITH CONDITIONS.
UM, NUMBER SIX IS ON CONSENT C 14 20 22 0 0 6 9 87 0 2 COLON.
UM, AND THAT'S RECOMMENDATION OF A G M U C O.
UM, ITEM SEVEN IS STA SEEKING STAFF POSTPONEMENT FOR UNTIL OCTOBER 18TH.
THAT'S C 14, 20 22, 4 9, 500 VFW ROAD.
ITEM EIGHT IS A SITE PLAN FOR CONSENTS.
P 20 21, 34 D, BKO, PARER, AND ITEM NINE IS, UH, SITE PLAN.
ALSO SEEKING STAFF POSTPONEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 18TH.
63 C COLONY PARK DISTRICT AQUATIC FACILITY, OH, SORRY.
ITEM 10 IS, IT SAYS NA, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS.
CHECK COMMISSION, LA AND I RUN.
OKAY, SO ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? YES.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT ITEM A IS STAFF AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
IT'S NOT SHOWN THAT WAY ON THE, ON THE AGENDA, BUT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
BUT, UH, I, I WANNA MAKE SURE IT IS SHOWN THAT WAY AS WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
STAFF AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS.
IT SAYS, UM, REQUEST TO VARY FROM LDC 25 8 3 42 TO ALLOW FILL UP TO FOUR FEET, UP TO 12 FEET.
AND I READ THAT THERE WAS A RECOMMEND APPROVAL FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
SO, SO OUR RE OUR CONSENT WOULD BE STAFF AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE COULD PLEASE NOTE THAT I HAD NUMBER FOUR IS, UH, SET FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT SET FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
OH, SO WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO IT'S REMOVED FROM THE, OKAY.
SO WE'LL BE DISCUSSING POSTPONEMENT OF THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR, YES, COMMISSIONER KING
[00:05:02]
CHAIR.I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE TIME, UH, BUT I SEE COMMISSIONER WOODY HAS JOINED US, SO I'M MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.
SO NOW I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE, UH, SEVEN COMMISSIONERS TONIGHT.
IS THERE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA IS READ.
SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER A COSTA.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF PASSING THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THE CHANGES TO THE MINUTES CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
SO THEN THANK YOU FOR THOSE WHO'VE COME.
[3. Rezoning: C14-2021-0003 - South Lakeline Residential-Mixed Use; District 6 (part 1 of 3)]
TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH WE'VE SEEN SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE.AND, UM, MR. ES CHAIR CONDITION LIAISON ACTUALLY WILL FIRST HEAR THE
[4. Rezoning: C14-2022-0039 - Peaceful Hill Residential; District 2 (part 1 of 2)]
DISCUSSION POSTPONE AND ITEM NUMBER FOUR.I, AS THAT WILL SET YOUR AGENDA FOR THE EVENING.
UM, IS THAT MS. RHODES OR DO WE OH, NO, NO, NO.
SO WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE POSTPONED.
SO WE'LL FIRST HEAR FROM THE REQUESTER.
AND SO, UM, MS. STOKES, I MEAN, MR. STOKES AND MISS VALENTI WILL PROVIDE THE REMARKS FOR A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT THREE MINUTES EACH.
I'M GONNA INTERRUPT YOU REALLY QUICKLY.
SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION IS JUST TO DISCUSS YES.
WHETHER OR NOT SHOULD BE POSTON.
I'M STILL CLARIFYING FOR MYSELF.
SO WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE ITEM SHOULD BE POSTPONED TONIGHT UNTIL, WHAT'S THE DATE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE IT? THE 18TH OR LATER.
BASED ON, AND I'LL GIVE YOU THE REASONS FOR THAT.
I'M ALSO A CONTACT PERSON FOR THE PEACEFUL HILL LANE PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION.
UH, WE'RE EAGER TO SHARE OUR THOUGHTS AND THE OPINIONS WITH ZAP, BUT WE ARE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
WE HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THIS PROPOSAL FOR UP TO A YEAR, BUT WE HAVE UNFORTUNATELY NOT BEEN ABLE TO COME TO MUTUAL AGREEMENT ON SEVERAL OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN COMPLICATED BY THE APPLICANT'S VERY SLOW RESPONSES TO OUR CORRESPONDENCE AND REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT.
BOTH SIDES ARE NEGOTIATING, ALTHOUGH OVER A PROTECTED PERIOD OF TIME AND TIMING OF THE APPLICANT RESPONSES HAD MADE IT DIFFICULT TO DISTRIBUTE INFORMATION AND ASSESS REACTIONS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO VARIOUS PROPOSALS OF THE APPLICANT IN A TIMELY FASHION.
IN SPITE OF THE SLOW APPLICANT RESPONSES, THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE IN AGREEMENT CAN BE REACHED IF THE MATTER WERE POSTPONED.
WHILE FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS TAKE PLACE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT OF SUFFICIENT LENGTH TO GIVE PEACEFUL HILL NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESOLVE OUTSTANDING DIFFERENCES PRIOR TO THE ZAP MEETING.
AND HERE'S THE IMPORTANT PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY THREE DISTINCT ZONING APPLICATIONS ON PEACEFUL HILL LANE GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE A NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO KEEP UP WITH ALL OF THE CORRESPONDENCE AND ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS AND ALL OF THE NECESSARY MOVES THAT ARE REQUIRED, UH, TO KEEP UP WITH THESE, UH, THREE ZONING CASES IN AN, AND PARTICIPATE IN AN INTELLIGENT MANNER.
SO THE FACT THAT WE'RE GETTING THESE ONE AT A TIME IS A HUGE HELP TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALLOW US TO DISCUSS THIS MORE INTELLIGENTLY WITH, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
AND I'LL HERE FOR MR. VALENTI TEAM.
MS. NCCI, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS MARGARET LENTI AND I LIVE ON PEACEFUL, PEACEFUL HILL LANE, AND I'VE LIVED IN MY HOME FOR OVER 15 YEARS.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THIS EVENING.
I'M REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORS OF THE PEACEFUL HILL PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION.
AS WAS ALREADY MENTIONED, THERE ARE THREE ACTIVE ZONING CASES ON PEACEFUL HILL LANE, TWO OF WHICH WERE ON YOUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.
ONE OF THEM HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT THE, THE CASE I'M TALKING TO YOU ABOUT RIGHT NOW.
UH, CASE, UH, 79 0 1 PEACEFUL HILL LANE, CASE NUMBER C 14 20 22 0 39.
AND WE ARE RESPECTFULLY ASKING FOR A POSTPONEMENT OF THIS CASE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
MORE TIME IS NEEDED TO PRESENT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL FROM THE DEVELOPER APPLICANT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK.
WHILE THE APPLICANT HAS RESPONDED TO OUR CONCERNS AND REQUESTS, WE HAVE BEEN BURDENED WITH VERY SLOW RESPONSE TIME, WHICH HAS MADE IT DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS IN
[00:10:01]
A TIMELY AND EFFICIENT MANNER.AND MORE TIME IS NEEDED TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE APPLICANT WITH THE GOAL OF COMING TO COMPLETE AGREEMENT IN ADVANCE OF, OF ZAP HEARING AND CITY COUNCIL HEARING.
UH, WE BELIEVE THIS IS POSSIBLE, AND WE BELIEVE WITH MORE TIME WE CAN COME TO CONSENSUS AND HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM THAT IS READY TO GO ON CONSENT.
UM, WHILE WE THEORETICALLY AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED LAND USE OF S F SIX, THE REQUEST FOR S F SIX ZONING, WE HAVE REQUESTS AND CONCERNS REGARDING THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT THAT SPECIFICALLY INFORMED THE FEEL AND THE CHARACTER AND THE CONNECTEDNESS OF THE NEW HOMES KNITTING TOGETHER WITH THE CURRENT HOMES ON PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
UM, AND THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT FOR US.
AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, THERE ARE THREE ACTIVE CASES ON OUR STREET.
THIS, THESE ARE ALL, UM, NEW CASES THAT WILL FOREVER INFORM THE, THE WAY THE STREET IS, UM, BUILT AND FIELDS.
AND WE CARE ABOUT HOW OUR CURRENT NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO INTERACT WITH OUR FUTURE NEIGHBORS, AND THAT THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT, UM, PART OF THIS PROJECT THAT, THAT WE CARE ABOUT.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVEN'T BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS.
AND WE WOULD JUST LIKE SOME MORE TIME TO DO SO BEFORE, UM, A ZAP HEARING AND A CITY COUNCIL HEARING.
SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING A POSTPONEMENT.
UH, MR. STOKES AND I ARE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
WELL, NOW HERE FROM, UH, THE OPPOSITION TO THE POSTPONING WITH VICTORIA HASSI.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, VICTORIA HASSI ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
UM, SO WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH POSTPONEMENT.
UH, THIS CASE WAS FILED BACK IN MARCH.
IT HASN'T BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A YEAR.
UM, I STARTED HAVING COMMUNICATIONS WITH MS. VALENTI, UH, BACK IN APRIL, AND WE DID HAVE TWO MEETINGS ON MULTIPLE EMAIL EXCHANGES BACK AND FORTH, UH, SINCE, SINCE THAT TIME.
SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT IN AUGUST, AND WE AGREED TO THAT REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT, AND THEN TWO ADDITIONAL WEEKS WERE ADDED TO THAT TIME BECAUSE OF A NOTIFICATION ERROR, UM, ON THE CITY'S PART.
OUR MOST RECENT COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN, UM, THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REACH AGREEMENTS ON SOME MATTERS, BUT NOT ALL.
AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON MEETING SOME OF THOSE MATTERS AS WE MOVE TO COUNCIL.
BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD THIS EVENING AND HAVE THIS PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT.
NOW HERE FOR MR. RON THROWER, COMMISSIONERS, RON THROWER REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER.
I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST IS THEY DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TWO ITEMS ON THE SAME AGENDA.
UH, ONE OF THE ITEMS Y'ALL HAVE POSTPONED FOR TWO WEEKS, SO WE'RE READY TO GO TONIGHT AS PER THEIR REQUEST.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THE POSTPONE.
ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS? I, I KNOW I HAVE ONE, SO, UM, OH, WELL, GO AHEAD.
UM, JUST CURIOUS FROM WHAT THE, UM, NEIGHBORS HAD SAID THEY HAVE, THEY'RE GENERALLY OKAY WITH SF SIX, BUT THEY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE LAYOUT AND, AND, UM, I'M GUESSING SOME OF THE OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE PROJECT, WOULD THOSE BE ADDRESSED IN ZONING OR WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING ONE SITE PLAN QUESTION FOR WHO'S THE QUESTION DIRECTED TOWARDS COMMISSIONER? IS THAT STAFF STAFF ABOUT THAT? I, I GUESS YEAH, STUFF.
CAN, CAN ANY OF THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS BE, BE ADDRESSED BY ZONING OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WOULD REALLY BE HANDLED AT SITE DEV DEVELOPMENT STAGE? UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS, MY NAME IS WENDY ROSE WITH THIS, WITH THE, UH, HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, SOME OF THE, AND I I IDENTIFIED IT IN THE ISSUE SECTION.
SOME OF THE ITEMS, UM, THAT ARE UNDER DISCUSSION ARE IN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
I, BUT IF THERE ARE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN CHAPTER 25, 2, THOSE COULD CERTAINLY BE ADDRESSED THROUGH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
BUT I'M, I DON'T KNOW WHAT SPECIFIC SITE VIOLENT REGULATIONS ARE, ARE UNDER DISCUSSION AT THIS TIME.
THERE ARE, BUT LIKE I SAID, THERE ARE AT LEAST A FEW ITEMS THAT BELONG IN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
THIS, THIS, UH, COULD ALSO BE, BE, UM, ADDRESSED TO THE, A APPLICANT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[00:15:02]
I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU COULD COME TO A AGREEMENT IF WE GAVE YOU THESE NEXT TWO, LIKE NEXT TIME WE WON'T HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM, IT'LL JUST BE ON CONSENT BECAUSE YOU ARE THAT CLOSE TO, I MEAN, THEY HAVE CLEARLY LISTED THE FOUR THINGS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.ARE THESE THINGS THAT YOU ARE INTERESTED IN, UH, APPROVING THESE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, THE FIVE FEET OF VEGETATION, THE SINGLE STORY UNITS IN THE FRONT, THE ATORY LIGHTING, ET CETERA? UM, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE DETAILS THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO COME TO AGREEMENT ON.
I BELIEVE SOME OF THOSE DETAILS ACTUALLY DON'T, DON'T DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUSTICE IN TERMS OF HAVING THIS DEVELOPMENT KNIT WELL WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS QUESTIONS.
I MAP TO GO AHEAD, MS. HI, MARGARET.
WELL, WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THE REQUEST FOR STANDALONE UNITS, I, I KNOW THE, THE, UM, THE LANGUAGE WAS WRITTEN AS SINGLE.
UM, WE, WE MEAN STANDALONE UNITS, NOT, UH, WE NEED, UH, DETACHED UNITS IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR.
OUR HOMES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT ARE SINGLE DETACHED UNITS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AS PART OF THE DESIGN OF, UM, OF THIS PROJECT.
AND, UM, I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT FEELS LIKE THEY CAN'T FIT THE DESIGN OF THEIR PROJECT, UH, ON THE SITE, GIVEN SITE CONSTRAINTS THAT THEY'RE, UH, SPEAKING ABOUT PRIMARILY TREES.
AND WE THINK IT'S POSSIBLE TO WORK AROUND THE TREES OR EVEN REMOVE SOME TREES TO MAKE, UH, STANDALONE UNITS WORK.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WILL BE AN IMPASSE AND THAT WE WILL BE STUCK IN THE SAME SITUATION ON OCTOBER 18TH IF WE, IF WE CHOOSE TO POSTPONE, IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
SO IN THAT CASE, DOES ANYBODY WANT TO PUT FORTH A MOTION TO MOVE US FORWARD? DO WE, DO WE WANT TO POSTPONE OR DO WE WANT TO HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT? COMMISSIONER COSTA, I MOVE THAT WE DENY POSTPONEMENT AND HEAR THE ITEM TONIGHT.
IS THERE A SECOND? ONE SECOND, MATT.
SO THERE'S A MOTION TO DENY THOSE POSTPONEMENT.
SECONDED FROM COMMISSIONER BOONE, ALL THOSE, ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE VOTE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR THEN OF DENYING THE POSTPONEMENT, HEARING THE CASE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST ME, A COSTA BOONE AND WOODY.
AND THOSE OPPOSED TO DENYING THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO FIRST WE'LL FINISH VOTING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, RIGHT? SO CONSENT IS THE MINUTES.
ITEM TWO, ITEM FIVE, SIX THROUGH NINE AND 10, WHICH WAS NA SURE.
I BELIEVE YOU DISPOSED OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I THOUGHT THE PURPOSE OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD GO.
THANK YOU FOR KEEPING ME ON TRACK.
[3. Rezoning: C14-2021-0003 - South Lakeline Residential-Mixed Use; District 6 (part 2 of 3)]
THREE THEN.GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, UH, SHERRY ES WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM B THREE, WHICH IS CASE C 14 20 21, 0 0 3, WHICH IS THE SOUTH LAKELINE RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE.
THE REQUEST IS FOR THE, UH, PROPERTY AT 26 10 AND A HALF SOUTH LAKELINE BOULEVARD.
AND THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM LR TO GM UCO ZONING.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS GM, UCO, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.
THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WILL PROHIBIT THE FOLLOWING USES AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SERVICES, AUTOMOTIVE SALES, AUTOMOTIVE WASHING, BAIL BOND SERVICES, DROP OFF RECYCLING, COLLECTION FACILITY, FUNERAL SERVICES, HOTEL MOTEL, OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, OUTDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATION PAWN SHOP SERVICES, SERVICE STATION AND CLUB OR LODGE USES ON THE SITE.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS UNDEVELOPED AND MODERATELY VEGETATED.
THERE IS FLOOD PLAIN ALONG THE
[00:20:01]
EASTERN PORTION OF THE TRACK.THIS SITE IS LOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE LAKELINE MALL ON SOUTH LAKELINE BOULEVARD.
THE FRONT PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND TAKES ACCESS TO SOUTH LAKELINE BOULEVARD.
THE REAR PORTION OF THE TRACK IS WITHIN THE CITY OF CEDAR PARKS JURISDICTION AND HAS ACCESS OFF OF WEST RIVER AREA CIRCLE, A RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR STREET.
THERE IS AN UN THERE IS UNDEVELOPED LAND AND A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH, TO THE EAST OF THIS SITE ALONG LAKELINE BOULEVARD.
THERE'S, THERE'S A FLOOD PLAIN AND A MULTI-FAMILY USED OR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX TO THE WEST.
THERE IS AN UNDEVELOPED LOT WITHIN THE CITY OF CEDAR PARK.
AND THE PARCEL TO THE SOUTH ACROSS LAKELINE BOULEVARD IS ZONE P AND IS PARKLAND.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS GM UCO ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT MEETS THE PURPOSE STATEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS IT IS LOCATED ON AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY AND WILL PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
THE SITE UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS CONSTRAINTS, UM, AS ONLY THE CORNER OR WESTERN PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY IS DEVELOPABLE BECAUSE OF FLOOD PLAIN GR UCO ZONING WILL PERMIT THE APPLICANT TO DEVELOP OFFICE, CIVIC AND COMMERCIAL USES ON THE SITE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST AND THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
TO THE NORTONS, TO THE SOUTHWEST, GR ZONING IS APPROPRIATE.
FRONTING AND ARTERIAL ROADWAY, LAKELINE BOULEVARD ACROSS FROM A PUBLIC PARK AND THE LAKELINE MALL DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN 0.75 MILES OF THE LAKELINE STATION REGIONAL CENTER, AS IDENTIFIED BY THE IMAGINE AUSTIN'S GROVES GROWTH CONCEPT MAP THAT IS FOUND IN THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS CHAIR, COMMISSION LAY ONO.
SO WE'LL HERE FOR THE APPLICANT, MS TO HASI.
MISSI, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI THOROUGH DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
JUST WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION.
REAL QUICK CHAIR, WE CAN ADD EASE OR JUST A FEW MINUTES AS I WILL, WILL GET THIS PRESENTATION.
I'M GONNA GO GET ANOTHER PAIR OF READING GLASSES.
[00:26:16]
CHAIR COMMISSION ONLY ON ANDREW.WOULD THE COMMISSION CONSIDER PROCEEDING TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR? SURE.
AND THEN, UH, TABLING THIS ITEM FOR THE TIME BEING.
OH, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR? NO.
[4. Rezoning: C14-2022-0039 - Peaceful Hill Residential; District 2 (part 2 of 2)]
GOOD EVENING.MY NAME IS, UH, WENDY ROSE, AGAIN WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, THIS IS A ZONING CASE LOCATED AT 79 0 1 PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
UH, THE REZONING AREA IS CONSISTS OF PLATTED LOT THAT HAS A DR, WHICH IS DEVELOPMENT RESERVE ZONING, UM, ASSIGNED IN ASSIGNED WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1984.
AND IT CONTAINS A FEW STRUCTURES AS WELL AS OUTSIDE STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT.
THERE IS AN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, UH, THAT IS ALL PROPOSED FOR COMMERCIAL USE.
IT'S ONE OF THE CASES THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE'RE REFERRING TO THE, UH, VERADO COMMUNITY.
CONDOMINIUM COMMUNITY IS LOCATED EAST AND SOUTH AND HAS S F SIX CO ZONING.
AND THEN THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS IN BEACON RIDGE TWO ACROSS PEACEFUL HILL TO THE WEST.
UH, THE APPLICANTS PROPOSING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO THE SF SIX DISTRICT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT UP TO 33 RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
THE BASIS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT SF SIX ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE EAST AND SOUTH AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING SINGLE FILMING RESIDENCES IN THE VICINITY.
THIS IS A CASE OF RESIDENTIAL INFILL THAT HAS, UH, ZONING CASE APPROVALS WITHIN THE PAST 15 YEARS THAT, THAT ALLOW FOR MORE COMPACT DEVELOPMENT.
THAT INCLUDES THE PARKRIDGE GARDENS, WHICH HAS S F FOUR ACO ZONING, AS WELL AS THE, UH, S F SIX CO ZONED VERRADO CONDOMINIUM COMMUNITY.
UH, S F SIX ZONING IS A REASONABLE OPTION FOR MULTIPLE APRIL PARCELS, SUCH AS THIS ONE, UH, TO BE REDEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL INFILL.
AND SF SIX CAN BE A TRANSITION TO SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH REFLECTS IT AS AN APPROPRIATE AND COMPATIBLE USE.
SO IN CONCLUSION, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR SF SIX ZONING AND BELIEVE THAT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH SINGLE FAMILY CHARACTER OF THE AREA, AND IT INCLUDES A SIMILARLY SITUATED CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, UH, TO THE, UH, EAST AND SOUTH.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
CHAIR ONE OUT HERE FROM THE APPLICANT FOR SIX MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI BERO DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
THE SUBJECT TRACT, UH, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS OUTLINED IN BLUE IN THE IMAGE BEFORE YOU.
CURRENTLY, THE SITE HAS A COMBINATION OF CONSTRUCTION, SALES AND SERVICE USES, AS WELL AS, UH, WHAT SEEMS TO BE STORAGE FACILITY TYPE OF USES.
THIS IS A MAP THAT SHOWS THE CONTEXT WITH THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS AS WELL AS TRANSIT ELEMENTS.
THE SITE IS ABOUT A MILE FROM A TOWN, UH, THE SOUTH PARK MEADOWS TOWN CENTER, AND IS 0.4 MILES FROM EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE ON SOUTH FIRST STREET.
WE ARE AWARE THAT ATD HAS A DESIRE TO EXTEND, FOREMOST DRIVE TO THE WEST OF SOUTH CONGRESS, WHICH IS WHAT YOU SEE THERE, UH, IN THE DASHED BLUE LINE.
UM, WITH THAT CONNECTION, HOPEFUL CONNECTION IN THE FUTURE THAT WILL ALSO
[00:30:01]
PLACE, UM, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THESE RESIDENTS IN CLOSER, UM, PROXIMITY DISTANCE TO OTHER TRANSIT ROUTES AS WELL.NEXT SLIDE ZONING TODAY IS DR.
DEVELOPMENT RESERVE, AND OUR REQUEST IS FOR SF SIX, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT SF SIX ZONED LANDS AND IS ALSO COMPATIBLE WITH THE SF TWO THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET AND THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE SITE HAS DR ZONING, BUT IT DOES NOT MEET THE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF DR ZONING.
FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES, WE'VE INCLUDED SF TWO AND SF THREE IN THIS TABLE, ALONG WITH OUR SF SIX REQUEST.
THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE THE SAME BETWEEN SF TWO, SF THREE, AND S F SIX, WITH EXCEPTION OF IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND S F SIX DOES NOT REQUIRE THE NEED TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND AS AN SF TWO OR AN SF THREE, UH, PROJECT WOULD.
MORE SPECIFICALLY, THIS SITE AT 2.73 ACRES WILL ALLOW AT MOST 33 SF SIX UNITS.
THAT IS, IT'S COMPARABLE TO THE DENSITIES AS SF TWO OR MORE CLOSELY TO SF THREE.
IT WILL ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY UNITS THAT OFFER VARIETY FROM THE TRADITIONAL STANDALONE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS.
SF SIX WILL, UH, DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE THE LEAST IMPACT ON THE EXISTING TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AS THE SALE OF THESE NEW HOMES WILL NOT BE COMPARABLE IN TERMS OF THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT'S, UM, APPRAISAL OF THE PROPERTY FOR TAX ASSESSMENT PURPOSES.
CONVERSELY, SF TWO AND SF SIX WOULD HAVE A MUCH GREATER IMPACT ON THE EXISTING HOMES IN THIS AREA, UH, WITH THE SALE OF NEW UNITS ON THIS TRACK.
SO, DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LAND WILL REQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION, UH, AND WILL, WHICH WILL ALSO, AND IT WILL ALSO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE 25 FOOT STEP BACK THAT ALL THE HOMES ENJOY ON THE WEST SIDE OF PEACEFUL HILL AND WILL CONTINUE THE SIDEWALKS ON THIS STRETCH OF PEACEFUL HILL.
THE TWO CIRCLES HIGHLIGHT HERITAGE TREES THAT ARE AN ASSET TO THE PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY AND WILL BE PRESERVED AND WORKED AROUND IN THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE.
OUR COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, HAS BEEN, UM, QUITE A BIT OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS.
THEY DO WANT BIGGER SETBACKS FROM PEACEFUL HILL.
THEY, THE CODE REQUIRES 25 FEET.
UH, THE VERRADO DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH, THEY SET THEIR DEVELOPMENT BACK BY 25 FEET.
AND ALL THE HOMES THAT ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF PEACEFUL HILL ALSO HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
WE REQUEST THAT THAT 25 FOOT SETBACK BE MAINTAINED, UH, INCREASING THAT SETBACK WILL ONLY END UP CAUSING EITHER A FOR LESS UNITS OR B, THE UNITS THAT WE DO ACHIEVE WILL BE SMALLER IN SIZE AND MAY NOT ACCOMMODATE FAMILIES AS WELL.
BY THE TIME RIGHT AWAY IS DEDICATED AND THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS CONSTRUCTED, THERE WILL BE ALMOST 110 FEET OF DISTANCE BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE WEST SIDE OF PEACEFUL HILL AND THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE EAST SIDE.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS STANDALONE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON THIS TRACK, UM, IN AN EFFORT TO PRESERVE THEIR TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
BUT WE CHALLENGE THAT THERE COULD BE SOME VARIETY.
THERE SHOULD BE SOME VARIETY AND A TRANSITION IN THIS AREA BETWEEN PEACEFUL HILL AND SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE.
THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL RENDERING THAT WE PROVIDED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THIS CONFIGURATION OF THE LAND WILL CAUSE FOR, UH, ONE ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY.
THERE'S AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY TODAY, AND THERE'LL BE ONE ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY ON THIS 300 FEET OF FRONTAGE.
IN TERMS OF SF TWO OR SF THREE, THERE COULD BE AT LEAST SIX DRIVEWAYS OR MORE IF THERE ARE FLAG LOTS.
AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS IS SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS STATED IS A CONCERN.
SO WE ARE LIMITING DRIVEWAY ACCESS BY DOING AN SF SIX DEVELOPMENT, AS IS SHOWN.
THIS IS ANOTHER RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THE TREES THAT YOU SEE THERE ALONG THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN ARE THE, UM, SUPPOSED TO BE IN PLACE OF THE HERITAGE TREES.
SO OUR MEETINGS AND EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE ARRIVED AT THE FOLLOWING AGREEMENTS THAT WE SEEM TO AGREE ON.
UM, AS YOU HEARD, UM, IN THE POSTPONEMENT DISCUSSION, UH, THERE ARE SOME ELEMENTS THAT WE DON'T HAVE AGREEMENTS ON, AND I BELIEVE WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE, THOSE ELEMENTS ACTUALLY TAKE AWAY FROM INVITING THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT TO BE A PART OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY.
UM, WHILE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MASONRY WALL DOES WALL OFF THESE NEW UNITS, UM, IT IS SOMETHING THAT OUR, THE LAND OWNER AND DEVELOPER HAVE
[00:35:01]
AGREED THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO PROVIDE.UM, BUT SOME OF THE OTHER ELEMENTS, UM, WE JUST, WE CAN'T, WE SEEM TO BE AT AN IMPASS ON, UM, WE HAVE MADE STRIDES TO GET TO THESE COMPROMISES AND WE REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING AT THIS LOCATION.
NOW, I ALSO HAVE A SUSAN HARKEY, UH, REGISTERED IN FAVOR, UH, TO BE IN PERSON.
UM, MOVING ALONG TO, UM, MR. STOKES.
MR. STOKES, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
UH, I WANNA MAKE CLEAR RIGHT UP FRONT THAT WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO SF SIX ZONING.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ENTIRE, THAT ENTIRE SIDE OF PEACEFUL HILL LANE, UH, ZONED SF SIX.
THERE IS A LARGE DEVELOPMENT THAT WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT, WHICH I'LL GET INTO.
BUT ON THE SLIDE YOU CAN SAY ONGOING ZONING, CASE TWO, THAT'S TWO OF THREE THAT ARE GOING ON.
UH, THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT THAT WE GOT AND IT SHOWS ALL VARIOUS UNITS AND IT SHOWS THE, UH, UH, TREE TREES AS, UH, TAKEN FROM A TREE SURVEY, WHICH WAS PROVIDED TO US ALSO.
UH, THE CEOS AND PRCS WE'D LIKE TO SEE.
AND SOME OF THESE HAVE BEEN AGREED TO THE ADDITIONAL, WELL, NOT THIS ONE, I'LL START WITH WHAT HASN'T BEEN AGREED TO.
ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER, LONG, PEACEFUL HILL LANE WITH A NEW MASONRY, SIX FOOT WALL ONLY, UH, STANDALONE UNITS PERMITTED ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
CLEAR STORY LIGHTING ONLY ON SECOND STORY BUILDINGS ON WALLS FACING PEACEFUL LANE, WHICH IS FOR PRIVACY PURPOSES.
AND A PRC LIMITING THE BEGINNING TRUCTURE HOURS TO 7:00 AM SINCE THIS IS GOING TO BE GOING ON RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
UH, THIS IS, UH, THE, IN THE INSPIRATIONAL, UH, IT'S BEEN TAGGED INSPIRATIONAL BY THE, UH, DEVELOPER.
UH, SO WE'RE NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS GONNA LOOK LIKE, BUT RIGHT NOW IT DOES NOT INCLUDE AN AREA FOR A SEVEN CAR OVERFLOW PARKING.
SO SOMETHING'S GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE ABOUT THIS PLAN.
NEXT, HERE'S AN OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING TREES HERE.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO COMPLIMENT THE DEVELOPER.
THEY'VE MANAGED TO AVOID CRITICAL ROOT ZONES IN MOST CASES.
BUT YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A, A PLETHORA OF ASH TREES HERE, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO WHY SOME OF THOSE ARE PROBLEMATIC.
BUT, UH, THE HERITAGE TREES AND PROTECTED TREES HAVE ALL BEEN, UH, DEALT WITH.
THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE ASH TREE THAT WAS TAKEN DOWN.
WELL, I'LL GET INTO THAT NEXT SLIDE.
UH, THIS IS THE EMERALD, UH, UH, UH, ASH BOER.
UH, MARGARET'S GONNA TALK ABOUT THIS AND THE THREAT IT POSES TO ASH TREES.
AND WE'LL JUST MOVE ON FOR NOW.
THESE ARE ASH TREES THAT THE APPLICANT ALREADY PROPOSES TO CUT DOWN.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY WANNA PRESERVE EVERY ASH TREE ON THIS LOT.
THEY'RE CUTTING DOWN SIX EXISTING ASH TREES THAT FALL INTO THEIR, UH, DRAINAGE AREA.
AND ONE THAT YOU SEE WITH A STAR WAS, UH, IS CUT DOWN BECAUSE OF THE NEED TO MAKE ROOM FOR THAT GREEN BUILDING THERE.
NEXT, UH, WHAT I'VE LISTED HERE ARE SIX ASH TREES AND AN UNKNOWN TREE THAT COULD BE ELIMINATED.
UH, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR, UH, MUCH GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS, UH, PROPOSED LAYOUT.
UM, AS I SAID, WE'RE TRYING TO GET, UH, STANDALONE UNITS UP, UP ALONG, NOT THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE THING.
WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR STANDALONE UNITS UP ON THE FIRST FOUR BUILDINGS IN, UM, IN, IN, IN THE TRACT.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT TO FOUR NEXT.
THIS IS SOMETHING I DID AND IT TOOK ME ABOUT TWO HOURS.
AND I'M SURE SOMEBODY ELSE WHO'S A BETTER ARCHITECT THAN I AM COULD DO MUCH BETTER.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, CAN YOU MOVE THIS TO THE OTHER SIDE PLEASE? THANK YOU.
THIS IS A DESIGN THAT HAS FOUR STANDALONE UNITS UP FRONT.
THIS IS SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT WE WANT.
EVERYBODY'S GOT A BACKYARD, EVERYBODY'S GOT A DRIVEWAY, EVERYBODY'S GOT A REAR YARD.
EVERYBODY'S GOT AN ENTRANCE TO THE REAR YARD.
THIS IS NOT AN IMPOSSIBLE PROBLEM.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IF THEY'RE WILLING TO WORK ON IT, THEY CAN DO.
A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECT SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THIS WORK OUT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
THE REASON WE WANT EVERYTHING PUSHED BACK FROM PEACEFUL HILL LANE, UH, IS FOR VERY GOOD REASON.
THAT'S NOT APPARENT IN THIS PLAN.
THERE'S AN APPLICANT TO THE IMMEDIATE NORTH OF THIS PLAN WHO HAS 43 ACRES.
[00:40:01]
ADD 1200 APARTMENT BUILDINGS, 80,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE, AND 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE, OVER 43 ACRES THAT'S BUDDING RIGHT ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE.WE FEEL IF EVERY SQUARE INCH OF PEACEFUL HILL LANE IS NOT PROTECTED AGAINST SUCH DEVELOPMENTS THAT THE, UH, THAT THEY COULD VERY WELL BE GRANTED AND THEY WOULD FOREVER CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
UH, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID NEXT.
I THINK THAT'S IT, RIGHT? OH, THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER ISSUES HERE.
THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR DESIGN.
NUMBER ONE, THERE'S NO ALLOWANCE FOR SEVEN, UH, OVERFLOW PARKING SPACES.
NUMBER TWO, THEIR WALL RUNS THROUGH A CRITICAL ROOT ZONE IN ONE OF THE HERITAGE TREES.
NEXT, UH, THIS REPRESENTS FIVE FOOT OF ADDITIONAL SETBACK.
THAT IS A PUNY, MINUSCULE PART OF THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S EASILY DONE IF YOU HAVE THE WILL TO DO IT.
NEXT, THIS IS A, AN ILLUSTRATION OF PART OF THE BUILDING FROM THEIR CONCEPT PLAN THAT SHOWS US A ONE STORY STRUCTURE.
THOSE ARE ALSO POSSIBLE TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THIS TO MAKE IT MORE, UH, COMPATIBLE WITH PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
AND FINALLY, THIS IS SHOWING, THIS IS THEIR CONCEPT PLAN, AND IT SHOWS CLEAR STORY WINDOWS FACING PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT, BUT WE WANT TO GUARANTEE OF THAT.
WE DON'T WANT JUST A PROMISE OF THAT, BUT CLEARLY IT'S SOMETHING AN ARCHITECT CAN DO AND SHOULD DO.
IS THAT IT? SO IN SUMMARY, LET ME JUST TALK ABOUT OUR REQUESTED CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS.
THE ADDITIONAL FIVE FOOT OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE WITH NEW MASONRY WALL ONLY, UH, STANDALONE UNITS PERMITTED ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
AND AS YOU SAW, TWO OF THEM ARE ALREADY THERE.
WE JUST WANT THE OTHER TWO TO BE THERE AS WELL.
YOU, YOU CAN READ THE REST OF THESE AND I'LL CLOSE OUT MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING.
WILL NOT HEAR FROM MS. BE MS. VALE.
UM, JOHN DID A GREAT JOB OF EXPRESSING OUR CONCERNS.
IT'S REALLY LANDS ON HAVING THOSE STANDALONE UNITS ALONG, UM, PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND MOVING BACK TO SLIDE FOUR.
UM, SO THIS IS THE SLIDE THAT TALKS ABOUT, UH, KNOWN TREES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE APPLICANT.
AND, UM, MR. STOKES, UH, OVERLAID THOSE TREES ON THIS, UH, CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN AND HAS CALLED OUT ALL OF THE ASH TREES, UM, ASH TREES.
I CURRENTLY, I AM A CITY EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE AND I WORK IN THE URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
UM, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S TRUE, I'M NOT HERE TALKING FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, I'M JUST HERE ON MY OWN ACCORD.
AND IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND MOVING TO THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, WE ARE AWARE OF THE PEST A DISEASE THAT'S COMING INTO CENTRAL TEXAS.
THIS IS A MAP OF THE, UH, SPREAD OF THE EMERALD ASH BOARD DISEASE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S ALREADY COMING INTO THE STATE OF TEXAS WHEN ASH TREES BECOME INFECTED WITH THIS PEST.
IT WILL DECIMATE ALL OF THE TREES IN, UM, AUSTIN AND CENTRAL TEXAS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
UH, THIS IS AN INVASIVE, INVASIVE SPECIES.
UH, I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE WORKS PLANS, UM, TO HAVE THE ASH TREE, ARIZONA ASH TREE REMOVED FROM THE LIST OF CITY TREES THAT REQUIRE MITIGATION BEES WHEN REMOVED.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S MOVING THROUGH THE, UM, CHAIN RIGHT NOW, AND I BELIEVE IS SET FOR, UM, A, A CHANGE TO THE CODE COME NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR.
SO, REMOVAL OF ASH TREES, OTHER THAN THE EXPENSE TO ACTUALLY REMOVE THE TREE BY, UH, BY A CERTIFIED AOR, UM, THERE WILL NOT BE ANY, HOPEFULLY THERE WILL NOT BE ANY FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO REMOVE THESE TREES.
THEY BECOME INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS IF THEY REMAIN STANDING.
SO, UM, THIS IS WHAT, THIS IS WHY JOHN AND I, UM, HAVE SPENT SOME TIME LOOKING AT THIS DESIGN TO, UM, THINK ABOUT WAYS IN WHICH WE COULD GET THOSE STANDALONE UNITS ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE.
UM, AND IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, ANDREW, UM, MOVING TO SLIDE EIGHT, I JUST WANNA, UM, POINT OUT AGAIN THAT, UH, THE STANDALONE UNITS ARE THOSE PINK
[00:45:01]
STRUCTURES THAT ARE, UH, TO THE WEST OF THE PROJECT NEAR THE, UH, THE ENTRANCE AND THE EXITS OF THE PROJECT.SO IT'S JUST REMOVING ASH TREES, I BELIEVE SEVEN OR SIX ASH TREES, UH, COULD GET REMOVED, AND A SLIGHT REDESIGN OF THE PROJECT COULD ACCOMMODATE FOR TWO MORE STANDALONE UNITS ON PEACEFUL HILL.
WELL, NOW I HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, SO ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS WHY, UH, WE CANNOT GIVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST TO HAVE ONLY STANDALONE UNITS, UM, SIMPLY COMES FROM A SPACE OF NEEDING THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF FLEXIBILITY.
THE PLAN THAT YOU SAW IN FRONT OF YOU IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
IT'S NOT A PLAN THAT'S BEEN LOOKED AT BY A, AN ENGINEER.
IT'S NOT A PLAN THAT'S TAKEN IN ALL THESE OTHER ELEMENTS THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN REQUIRES IN A SITE PLAN INTO CONSIDERATION.
SO WE NEED TO MAINTAIN A LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY.
AS I TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN OUR COMMUNICATIONS, THE LANDOWNER IS NOT, NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO TRYING TO MEET THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST TO HAVE STANDALONE UNITS ALONG PEACEFUL HILL, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CANNOT, UM, THEY CANNOT REQUIRE BECAUSE THEY NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE PROVIDING, OR WE ARE AGREEING THROUGH PRIVATE AGREEMENT, THAT WE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL 10% ADDITIONAL PARKING, UH, ABOVE WHAT THE CITY REQUIRES FOR A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS.
SO WE NEED TO MAINTAIN AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY AS POSSIBLE AS WE MOVE INTO A SITE PLANNING PHASE.
AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GIVE THEM CERTAINTY THAT YES, THE ONLY UNITS ALONG PEACEFUL HILL WILL BE STANDALONE.
BUT I HAVE TO SAY, I DO QUESTION, I'M NOT SURE WHY IT MATTERS THAT THOSE UNITS ALONG PEACEFUL HILL ARE STANDALONE BECAUSE FROM THE STREET, THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK THE SAME WHETHER THEY WERE BY THEMSELVES OR ATTACHED TO ANOTHER UNIT.
AND ESPECIALLY BEHIND A SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL AND TREE CANOPY THAT IS INTENDED TO NOT, THAT IS INTENDED TO BUFFER ANY VISUAL, UM, UH, SIGHT LINES ACROSS THE STREET.
SO I I, I'M NOT SURE WHY, WHY THERE'S A NEED TO HAVE STANDALONE UNITS FROM THAT SENSE, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS SAID THAT THEY WILL TRY TO ACCOMMODATE, BUT THEY NEED TO MAINTAIN A LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY.
UM, ALSO REGARDING THE 25 FOOT STEP BACK, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE FEET MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A LOT, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S A MATTER OF NEEDING TO BE AS FLEXIBLE AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AS WITH REGARDS TO THE ASH TREES, UNTIL CODE PROVISION IS PASSED, THAT, THAT GIVES OUR CLIENT AND LANDOWNER CERTAINTY THAT THERE WON'T BE MITIGATION REQUIRED FOR REMOVAL OF ASH TREES.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN COMMIT TO AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UM, BUT ALL OF THAT SAID, THEY ARE AGREEING TO PLANT MORE TREES ALONG PEACEFUL HILL THAN WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BY CODE.
UM, THEY'RE AGREEABLE TO THE MASONRY WALL.
THEY'RE AGREEABLE TO TRY TO FLEX, TRY TO ACCOMMODATE STANDALONE UNITS IF IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO AGREE TO ON A WRITTEN DOCUMENT.
UM, THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE AGREED TO THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY AGREED TO QUITE A FEW THINGS SUCH AS THE MASONRY WALL.
UM, WE'VE AGREED TO, WELL, I'LL LEAVE IT THERE.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, DO I SEE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO, MOVE BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
IS THERE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODY? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING? I, I'M GONNA GO FIRST BECAUSE I JUST, I'M UP HERE BY MYSELF AND I HAVE A LOT OF FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS AND SO I'M JUST GONNA GET IT OUT.
UM, 25 FOOT STEP BACK IS STANDARD.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S SOME, IT'S JUST THE WIG.
YOU LOOK DOWN THE STREET, IT HELPS WITH SIGHT LINES.
SO I, I JUST, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT WE WOULD COMPROMISE ON FIVE, AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET.
THAT'S, I'M AL I'M FIVE FEET TALL.
THAT WOULD BE LIKE A CO A COUCH WITH ME PUTTING MY FEET OUT.
I LIVE IN A 900 SQUARE FOOT HOME.
YOU CANNOT SAY YOU WANT SEPARATE BUILDINGS, BUT YOU DON'T WANNA CUT DOWN THE TREES THAT YOU, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF PUTTING THE BUILDINGS TOGETHER, IS THAT YOU'RE SAVING GREEN SPACE.
SO YOU CAN'T ASK FOR TWO THINGS AT ONCE.
UM, BUT THEN IT'S OKAY TO CUT DOWN SOME
[00:50:01]
TREES, BUT NOT OTHER TREES.UM, WHAT ELSE? UM, THE, YEAH, I THINK THE WINDOW, THIS IS AN AESTHETIC THING.
I, I THINK A LOT OF THESE THINGS SHOULD BE WORKED OUT, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU GET HERE.
I JUST, I'M, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION HOURS, ALL THESE THINGS ARE THINGS THAT, AND THEN YOU'RE ASKING FOR 10% MORE PARKING ON TOP OF IT.
I JUST, I'M, I'M, IT'S JUST, I'VE NEVER, UH, UM, OKAY.
SO THAT, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS THAT YOU'RE, YOU CAN'T ASK FOR MORE PARKING, PROTECT THE TREES, PUSH EVERYTHING BACK.
YOU'RE JUST CONSTRAINING THEM INTO THIS LITTLE THING.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT NORTH OF THERE YOU'RE VERY CONCERNED.
IT'S A LOT OF PROPERTY THAT IS, IS RIGHT FOR DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND.
I THINK I'M OKAY WITH THE 25 FOOT STEP SETBACK.
I MEAN, I THINK WHO NEEDS A WALL? IF IT'S GONNA MAKE YOU GO INTO THE ROOT ZONE OF A HERITAGE TREE, I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE A WALL.
IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME WHETHER OR NOT THE PEOPLE CAN SEE THE STREET.
I WANT PEOPLE TO SEE THE HOMES THAT ARE THERE.
UM, SO, UH, I'M SORRY IF I'M RAMBLING, BUT THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE KIND OF MY THOUGHTS THAT I DON'T CARE IF IT'S SEPARATED OR NOT.
I PREFER TO BE A 25 FOOT STEP BACK CUZ THAT'S THE STANDARD.
UM, I SAY PROTECT THE TREES AT ALL COSTS, CUZ THAT'S, WE'RE THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
AND, UM, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE WINDOWS EITHER.
ANYONE ELSE? UM, COMMISSIONER KING AND THEN COMMISSIONER BOONE.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I, UH, I AGREE WITH MANY OF YOUR SENTIMENTS THERE, CHAIR.
UH, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD PROTECT THE TREES.
YOU KNOW, I, I'VE HAD, YOU KNOW, I'M ASSUMING THEY'RE CALLING THESE ARIZONA ASH TREES.
IS THAT, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? YOU KNOW, I HAD ONE, YOU KNOW, WE HAD ONE AROUND OUR HOME HERE AND IT FINALLY DIED IT FIND, BUT IT WAS A MAGNIFICENT TREE AND IT PROVIDED GOOD SHADE AND IT'S PART OF IMPORTANT PART OF OUR CANOPY HERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M, I SHARE YOUR CONCERN ABOUT JUST CUTTING DOWN THE TREES AND ALSO THE 10% ADDITIONAL PARKING.
YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT TO, I WANNA MAKE SURE THOUGH, THAT WE DO HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING ON SITE HERE.
SO NOW I GETTING INTO MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKING AND ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF OTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT'S UNDERWAY OR ABOUT TO GET UNDERWAY ON THAT STREET, AND I JUST SAW IT, I HAVE THIS, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR, UH, TRANSPORTATION STAFF ABOUT THAT, ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IN HAS, WAS IT DONE IN THE CONTEXT OF THESE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE UNDERWAY OR ABOUT TO GET UNDERWAY? HI, UH, THIS IS JUSTIN.
HI, UH, THIS IS JUSTIN GOOD WITH THE CHAIR COMMISSION.
IF YOU CAN, UM, TURN ON YOUR CAMERA PLEASE.
AND, AND MR. GOOD, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I'M, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG PEACEFUL HILL THERE, THAT, THAT ROAD.
SO YOU MEAN THE ONE JUST NORTH OF THE ZONING CASE IN QUESTION, RIGHT, RIGHT.
ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT THAT ROAD.
UM, SO THE TIA THAT WE PERFORMED FOR THAT ZONING CASE, UM, DID NOT TAKE THE ZONING CASES ALONG PEACEFUL HILL ROAD, THE OTHER ONE'S INTO ACCOUNT.
UM, SOLELY BECAUSE FOR A PROJECT TO QUALIFY AS A BACKGROUND PROJECT, UM, IT HAS TO BE WITH AN APPROVED SITE PLAN.
UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE TRIGGER FOR WHEN SOMETHING CAN BE, UH, BACKGROUND PROJECT FOR A T.
WELL, SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, UH, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE COMMISSION AND I KNOW THE COMMUNITY HAS A, UH, YOU KNOW, A BALLET QUESTION ABOUT WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES FINALLY, UH, COME TO FRUITION AND FOLKS WHO ARE LIVING IN THESE DEVELOPMENTS, HOW WILL THAT IMPACT THIS, THIS ROAD? IT LOOKS LIKE A SUBSTANDARD ROAD HERE.
UM, I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THE KIND OF ZONING CASE IN QUESTION, UM, WAS UNDER THE ANALYSIS THRESHOLD MM-HMM.
LIKE I SAID, A TIA WAS PERFORMED, UM, THAT INCLUDED AN NTA WITH IT.
AND, AND WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THE, THE MEMO FOR THAT ONE.
WELL, IT, IT, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE TH THIS DEVELOPMENT, THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS NOT BEEN, YOU KNOW, PUT INTO THE MIX YET.
IF YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG OR HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW THE DEVELOP THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS NOW BEEN FACTORED INTO, UH, THE, THE, THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG PEACEFUL HILL LANE HERE.
YEAH, SO LIKE I SAID, BECAUSE THE ONE TIA THAT WE HAVE THAT'S TAKING ACCESS TO PEACEFUL HILL LANE
[00:55:01]
ONLY LOOKS AT APPROVED SITE PLANS IN TERMS OF BACKGROUND PROJECTS, UM, IT WASN'T TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.UM, AND THEN THE SUBJECT TRACKED, UM, DID NOT TRIGGER AN NTA OR A TIA.
UH, SO THE, THE, I QUESTION ABOUT, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THE, THE PARKING QUESTION TOO.
YOU KNOW, I DO APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT ON SITE PARKING SO THAT IT, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T IMAGINE PARKING ON PEACEFUL HILL LANE THERE.
SO CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT, HOW THE PARKING, UH, WILL BE ADDRESSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT? I SAW AMBER POPPED ON, I'LL DEFER TO HER.
SHE'S MORE THE, UH, SITE PLAN REVIEW.
HI, AMBER HUTCHINS WITH THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
SO WHEN YOU MEET YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS, UH, THROUGH TANDEM PARKING, LIKE THEY LOOK TO BE PROPOSING, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN, SO IT'S HARD TO TELL, BUT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE 10% OF UNRES RESERVED PARKING SOMEWHERE ELSE ON SITE, SO OKAY.
VISITORS CAN COME AND, AND PARK EASILY, SO, OKAY.
WELL, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE ADDITIONAL 10% IS, SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ALREADY REQUIRED UNDER THE CODE.
SO, UH, I APPRECIATE THAT INFORMATION AND, AND ALSO, UH, THAT PARKING WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ON PEACE HILL LANE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT YOU COULDN'T PARK YOUR CAR ON PEACE HILL LANE AND BE A RESIDENT OF THIS OR A VISITOR TO THIS SIDE? I DON'T, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STREET TO SEE IF THERE'S A SIGNAGE ON IT FOR NO PARKING.
RIGHT NOW, MY GUESS IS THE PAVEMENT, BECAUSE IT'S SUBSTANDARD, MIGHT BE THIN ENOUGH THAT THAT'S THE CASE.
UM, IF THE ROADWAY EVER IMPROVED ON STREET PARKING MIGHT BE A POSSIBILITY.
UH, THEN YOU GOT, YOU GOT WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT.
I APPRECIATE THAT AND I HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M, I HOPE THAT THAT WILL BE LOOKED AT AND BE ADDRESSED, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT GOES THROUGH.
SO, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.
I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
OH, YOUR, YOUR NEXT MIS UH, COMMISSIONER BOONE.
UM, I GUESS IN IN GENERAL, I, I WOULD ECHO A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN STATE BY THE COMMISSIONERS ALREADY.
UM, I WOULD WANT TO CLARIFY THE, THE WRITTEN REQUEST HERE FOR THE COMMERCIAL OVERLAY SAYS ONLY SINGLE STORY UNITS.
WELL, VERBALLY THE STATED THAT THE RE UNIT, UM, I THINK FOR ME THE POINT IS KIND OF MO I WOULDN'T WANT TO AGREE THE OTHER ONE OF THOSE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO KNOW THE DISCREPANCY IN THE, UM, IN THE STATEMENT THERE.
UM, AT THE RISK OF CONTINUING OUR REPUTATION OF BEING THE SHADOW TRANSPORTATION BOARD HERE, I, I'D WANT TO NOTE THAT THIS KIND OF RUNS THE FOUL OF ONE OF OUR PET ISSUES, UM, OF KIND OF HAVING TWO EXITS THAT ARE REALLY JUST ONE EXIT AND NOTE THAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, UM, HAS A STREET THAT GOES UP TO THE PROPERTY, UH, LINE, I GUESS THAT'S, UH, VIRTU BOULEVARD.
AND THEN ALSO BASED ON THE DISCUSSION AROUND FOREMOST DRIVE, THERE PROBABLY BE ANOTHER, UM, ADJACENT, UH, ROADWAY.
AND SO YOU, WE THINK OF CONNECTIVITY, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR CARS OR FOR PEOPLE OR RIDE OR WHATEVER, JUST KIND OF WANT A NOTE THAT THIS IS A, A CHANCE TO AVOID A MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
IF I CONJUGATE THAT CORRECTLY.
UM, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPERS TO CONSIDER THAT.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT, OTHER THAN MAKING THE ADDITION OF CLEAR STORY WINDOWS HERE TO, UM, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT FURTHERS INTEGRATION THE NEIGHBORHOOD SEEMS LIKE IT GAVE ME OUTTA DIRECTION.
UM, AND SO ECHO THE COMMENTS ALREADY STATED ON THOSE NOTES, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE.
UH, VICE CHAIR KOBASA IN MIND.
I, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE ROAD TOO BECAUSE I NOTICED IN THE RALPH BLEANO CASE, WHICH IS VERY CLOSE BY, THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERED SUBSTANDARD ROADS.
AND IT MAY HAVE EVEN SAID IT IN THIS CASE THEY'RE, CUZ THEY'RE BOTH INCLUDING THE SAME ROADS.
BUT I WAS ALSO, SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND THAT WE'RE AGAIN, GETTING AHEAD OF UPDATING INFRASTRUCTURE AND I REALIZE THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, BUT THAT JUST DOES SEEM TO BE A PROBLEM.
BUT I LOOKED AT THE OTHER CEOS FOR THE ADJACENT PRO, THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UM, WENDY FOR APPOINTING ME IN THE DIRECTION OF THOSE.
AND THE COS WERE FOR APPROXIMATELY LIKE 10 UNITS PER ACRE ESSENTIALLY TO LIMIT, UM, FOR THIS SF SIX.
THAT'S AJA THAT'S NEARBY AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE THE VERDO ONE.
AND SO I WAS HO I WAS THINKING THAT THE, IT WOULD THEN, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT THERE'S SF SIX THERE, THEN YOU SHOULD POINT OUT THAT IT'S ACTUALLY SF SIX CO AND THAT WOULD BE A MORE COMPARABLE, UM, AND APPROPRIATE ZONING
[01:00:01]
THERE.AND THE CO FOR THE SF FOUR IS TO HAVE A HEIGHT LIMIT OF ONE STORY FOR OUR HOMES ADJACENT TO VILLE, PEACEFUL HILL STREET OR ROAD.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE APPROPRIATE TOO, IS TO HAVE A CO DALE LIMIT THE HEIGHT LIMIT AND UM, AND THOSE WOULD ALSO SOLVE PROBLEMS OF SAVING TREES.
AND IT WOULD BE ALSO AN EASIER FIT OF OVERFLOW PARKING CUZ I NOTICED IN THE INSPIRATIONAL DESIGNS THAT IT DOESN'T SHOW WHERE THE OVERFLOW PARKING WOULD GO.
SO THOSE ARE JUST MY CONCERNS AND SO I'M INCLINED NOT TO SUPPORT THIS UNLESS WE HAVE UM, SOME COS IN PLACE.
ANYONE ELSE? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER COSTA? SO I ASKED THE QUESTION WHEN WE WERE CONSIDERING, UH, POSTPONEMENT OF WHETHER OR NOT THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS WOULD FALL UNDER ZONING BECAUSE IT IS THE PURVIEW OF THIS BOARD OR THIS COMMISSION TO SEE IF ZONING IS APPROPRIATE.
AND I STILL SAY THE ANSWER FOR THAT IS THAT YES, S OF SIX, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THERE WASN'T S OF SIX IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS ONE, IT'S WITHIN HALF A MILE OF A REGIONAL CENTER.
THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR S OF SIX ARE THE SAME AS THE SF TWO AND THE SN, THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ROUNDED THAT.
RIGHT? REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S ONE STORY OR TWO, IT'S 35 FEET HIGH MAXIMUMS ON, ON ALL SIDES.
SO I THINK THAT WE ARE SEEING COMPATIBILITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A KIND OF DENSITY THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE WITH WHAT WE HAVE PLANNED.
AND I THINK THAT THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR CONCERN, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE AESTHETICS IS NOT AS, YOU KNOW, CAN BE WORKED OUT LATER OR NOT, BUT LIKE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE TYPE OF ZONING FOR THE AREA, I THINK IS THE MAIN QUESTION.
AND YEAH, I JUST FEEL LIKE SOME OF THE QUESTION OR SOME OF THE CONCERNS ARE MOSTLY AROUND LIKE WHETHER NEIGHBORS CAN SEE INTO BACKYARDS AND I THINK THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY, UH, IT'S A VALID CONCERN FOR PROPERTY OWNER, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT AS A BOARD, DO WE NEED MORE HOUSING IN THE CITY? I THINK, YOU KNOW, WEIGHING THE TWO, I THINK WE, I THINK S OF SIX IS AN APPROPRIATE THING OR AN APPROPRIATE ZONE AND THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS AND AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT CAN BE PLACED IN THE AREA FITS THAT.
AND ADDITIONALLY THIS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MEETING WITH THE RESIDENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS CONCERNS.
THEY ARE ADDING A WALL, THEY ARE ADDING ADDITIONAL PARKING AND I THINK THAT THOSE ARE SHOW GOOD FAITH THAT THEY WANNA WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY.
COMMISSIONERS THOMPSON OR WOODY, ANYTHING? I GUESS LET'S SAY IT, IT WON'T CHANGE MY VOTE AND I'M CURIOUS WHY THE PREFERENCE FOR THE FREESTANDING UNITS ALONG THE FRONT OF THE STREET.
I I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT REQUEST, SO COULD I ASK THAT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION? PEACEFUL HILL FOLK.
UH, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAINTAIN A SINGLE UNIT LOOK SO THAT THE NEXT DEVELOPER COMING DOWN THE LINE, WHICH IS HAVING THIS MASSIVE GARINE PROJECT CANNOT POINT TO THE MULTIPLE, I'M GONNA CALL IT MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS.
I KNOW THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY MF THREE, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE UNITS THAT HAVE MULTIPLE FAMILIES IN THEM.
AND WE THINK THAT IF THERE'S A VISUAL BUFFER OF SINGLE UNIT, SINGLE UNITS AT THE FRONT OF THAT, THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT REALLY HARD FOR ANOTHER DEVELOPER TO COME ALONG AND SAY, I WANNA PUT A FOUR STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING NOW.
I KNOW IT SEEMS LIKE MAY SEEM LIKE A TRIVIAL POINT, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT GIVEN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, THANK YOU.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF WENDY AND THEN I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER WOODY MIGHT HAVE HAD A COMMENT OR QUESTION.
WENDY, IF, DO THEY, DO THEY HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE IF THEY ARE S F SIX AND THEY, THEY'RE NOT SUBDIVIDING? UH, LET, LET ME TAKE A LOOK AT THE PARKLAND COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED HERE.
SO YES, PARKLAND DEDICATION WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND IT LOOKS LIKE AT THIS TIME, UM, THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE MET WITH EITHER FEES IN LIE OR DEDICATED LAND.
[01:05:01]
TARA.CAN I JUST MAKE A FOLLOW UP COMMENT ON MY QUESTION? UM, WELL WOODY WAS NEXT AND THEN YOU CAN GO OH, OKAY.
I'M STILL TRYING TO FIND ONE THING REALLY QUICK.
OKAY, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
WELL I, IT'S UM, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT BECAUSE I THINK THIS KIND OF PREFERENCE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS A, IS THE KIND OF THING THAT APPEARS IN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T HAVE, DOESN'T HAVE THAT.
AND SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
CAUSE I THINK THAT THEY, OUR AT A VISIT THE DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE